In June, we celebrated the approval of Colorado Springs’ first cottage court—a milestone not only for this project, but for the future of Missing Middle housing in our community. The approval represents years of advocacy, thoughtful planning, and a willingness by City staff and Planning Commission to embrace a housing type that has long been discussed but rarely built.
I wanted to share a few lessons from the process.
For decades, zoning codes in Colorado Springs—as in most communities across the country—have made developments like cottage courts incredibly difficult to build. Ironically, these same communities often adopt comprehensive plans and housing strategies that call for exactly this type of neighborhood.
Cottage courts provide an opportunity to build smaller homes on individual lots while fitting seamlessly into neighborhoods of detached and attached single-family homes. They offer the benefits of homeownership at a more attainable price point while achieving densities comparable to many multifamily developments—all without feeling like traditional apartment complexes.
Finding the Right Partnership
We were fortunate to meet the owners of a property just east of downtown Colorado Springs. Even more importantly, Alex and Lee shared a vision of creating smaller, more attainable homes that would help address our city’s growing housing needs.
Our initial conversations centered around the barriers that prevent Missing Middle housing from being built. We quickly realized we shared the same goals, and nine months later, Cottage Court on Costilla received unanimous approval from the Planning Commission.
The approved development will include fourteen attached single-family homes, each on its own individually owned lot. Parking will be provided through a combination of alley-accessed off-street spaces and adjacent on-street parking. A small homeowners association will maintain the shared landscape areas and coordinate services such as waste removal.
Why This Project Was Possible
Colorado Springs was fortunate to have one zoning district that provided enough flexibility to make this project possible.
The property is zoned MX-L (Mixed-Use Large Scale), one of the city’s most adaptable zoning districts. MX-L was added to the Unified Development Code (UDC) to preserve the prior development rights of a higher-intensity commercial development while allowing residential development, the district has very few traditional development limitations. Maximum density, setbacks, lot coverage, and even building placement are largely unrestricted. Under the existing zoning, a 65-foot-tall commercial or multi-family building could have been constructed directly along the property lines.
That flexibility allowed us to propose something much gentler:
a neighborhood of small homes that fits comfortably within the surrounding community.
Unfortunately, MX-L is the exception—not only within Colorado Springs, but across much of the country. Most zoning districts still make projects like this difficult or impossible, even when they align perfectly with the goals expressed by city leaders and adopted comprehensive plans.
The Biggest Obstacle: Parking
Even the MX-L district wasn’t without challenges. The largest hurdle was parking. Because cottage courts consist of individually owned single-family homes in contrast to a single multi-family structure, the zoning code required each home to provide two off-street parking spaces—the same requirement applied to a large suburban house. That standard simply didn’t fit the reality of this project.
Our homes range from just 510 to 960 square feet and include only one- and two-bedroom floor plans. They are designed for smaller households with different transportation needs than a conventional suburban family living in a three- or four-bedroom home with a two-car garage.
Had the parking standard recognized these differences, the project likely would have been approved administratively, saving at least two months of review time along with significant financing and consultant costs. Instead, we brought the project before Planning Commission and made the case for a more common-sense approach.
Applying the Right Standard
We argued that these homes function much more like small multi-family units than conventional suburban houses and should therefore follow similar parking standards. For comparison, the City of Colorado Springs requires:
- One parking space for studio and one-bedroom multi-family units.
- One and one-half parking spaces for two-bedroom multi-family units.
- Two parking spaces for multi-family units with three or more bedrooms.
Applying the same logic to the cottage court simply made sense. Fortunately, City Planning staff and the Planning Commission agreed. Their approval demonstrated that flexibility within the code can produce better housing outcomes without compromising neighborhood compatibility.
Had the project ultimately gone to City Council, I believe they would have reached the same conclusion.
Looking Forward
The approval of Cottage Court on Costilla is about much more than one development. It demonstrates that Colorado Springs can successfully introduce a housing type that bridges the gap between detached single-family homes and traditional multi-family housing. It provides attainable homeownership opportunities, uses land more efficiently, and creates neighborhoods that are both walkable and community-oriented.
Perhaps most importantly, it shows that many of the barriers preventing Missing Middle housing are not design challenges—they are regulatory ones. As cities across the country search for solutions to the housing crisis, updating zoning codes to allow housing types like cottage courts should be part of the conversation.
If you’d like to learn more about the Cottage Court on Costilla—or are interested in purchasing one of these homes—visit Costilla Cottages at https://costillacottages.com/.